my nickel and dime thoughts. in denver. remember 8:00 p.m. meese -- 8:00 p.m. eastern although a permit night. what about that candidates who are dismissing the debt? antonio villaraigosaand how about we from the gray cityf cleveland. david: "money with melissa francis" is next. >> the complaint speaks for itself. flagrant violations of law here, misrepresentations to investors. representations they were conducting what they call a robust and intense due diligence process were all a slam. they didn't have effective due diligence process. we have internal documents reflecting that. melissa: that is new york attorney general eric schneiderman. i spoke with him about the new lawsuit he brought against jpmorgan over the financial crisis. we have more in a moment. charlie gasparino is here with breaking news on this story. here's what is also money tonight. president obama and mitt romney getting ready to face off in the first presidential debate. one man who didn't get an

invitation? libertarian presidential candidate, gary johnson of the he will join us here live. plus an influential coal miners union says it won't endorse president obama's slamming the administration's war on coal. will ts be a deciding factor in the election? houses of millionaires collecting unemployment checks? does that make sense to you? even when they say it's not it is always about money. melissa: so here's look at the day's market headlines. spain's prime minister denying speculation that a spanish bailout request is imminent. stocks pared early session gains following the news and the dow closed down 32 points on the day. a mixed picture for u.s. auto sales in september. chrysler posted a strong 12% year-over-year gain. general motors saw a tepid 1.5% advance and ford sales were basically flat. shares of metropcs

skyrocketed nearly 18%. deutsche telekom's t-mobile is reportedly in talks to merge with metropcs. the big story all night and all day, the new york's attorney general hits jpmorgan with a civil lawsuit over mortgage-backed securities. it will be the first of what could be a long line of lawsuits. the crux of the case which bear stearns purchased by jpmorgan in 2008, misrepresented the risk in their mortgage-backed securities making them appear safer investments than they actually we. i spoke with new york attorney general eric schneiderman today and here is what he had to say about the case. >> this is not a working group. my office is not singling out this one firm..3 there will be other cases against other firms. just turns out a lot of the conduct by bear executives was particularly flagrant. they engaged in a pattern of misrepresentations over a period of years. they clearly identified their relationships with the loan originators, people like countrywide and

american home mortgage and greenpoint, as what they called client number one and favored them at the expense of their investors. same pattern of misrepresentation. melissa: you mentioned the president. this is part of the mortgage working group, put together by the president. we're five weeks out from the election. a lot of people are asking question is this politically motivated? >> no. prosecutors bring cases, look, i wsh we would have been ready earlier. i've been on record encouraging everyone to go faster on these investigations. this is the first case. there will be more. and it will keep going long after the election season is over. melissa: let's talk about how you got ready for that because you did hire carla sanchez who came from patterson, webb and tyler one of the firms that privately sued jpmorgan chase on the same account. jpmorgan is saying in one of their statements that w will put up for the viewers a lot of this relied on basically recycled

information from her that she brought with her. what do you think about that? >> well, no. actually carla sanchez is a terrific lawyer. she has recused herself from the litigation against bear in excess of caution. i'm not sure it was actually required b it was some point raised by the lawyers for jpmorgan and they know full well they raised the point and she is not on this case but we have a spreadsheet that we developed with our federal colleagues of 20, 25 pages of different litigations that have been brought against bear. we're not wasting the taxpayers money by reint venting the wheel. we're absolutely looking at documents uncovered and depositions taken in dozens and dozens of lawsuits. we cite in our complaint to a fhfa case brought again on behalf of the fhfa and fhfa inspector general is a part of our task force. their staff is working closely with us. of course we're building on what went before. we have reviewed thousands of documents independently.

we have chked every source. we interviewed dozens of witnesses all across the country again with the cooperation of our working group partners and the facts of the complaint really speak for themselves. my office is the only entity that can bring a martin act complaint. this is not about one deal or two deals or 10 deals as many of the other cases are. this is about the entire pattern of conduct. melissa: let me ask you to respond -- >> bear stearns misled investors. melissa: hang on a second. they said we're disappointed the new york attorney general decided to pursue the civil action without opportunity to rebut claims and instead relying on recycled caims made by private plaintiffs. how do you respond to that? did you not give them an opportunity to respond? >> no. melissa, this is, a blatantly false statement. we first subpoenaed them as i have already said in june of last year. we've had numerous interactions with their attorneys. they have been in our offices. they made their arguments.

this is, listen, i'm sorry, that they feel that they have to resort to things that are demonstrably false. the complaint speaks for itself. the flagrant viations of law here. misrepresentations to investors. representations they were conducting what they called a robust and intense due diligence process were all a sham. they didn't have effective due diligence process. we have internal documents reflecting that. we have substantial evidence -- performed their due diligence on it. melissa: in their second statement where they say they acquired over the course of theeekend, this company, at the behest of the u.s. government. i think they feel likethey were forced to buy this company at a time when the country's financial system was falling apart and that in essence, no good deed goes unnished. here you are coming after them, penalizing them, suing them for something they did to try and help the financial system. that is their argument. how do you respond to that? >> i have, high regard for a

lot of the folks over there but with all due respect they bought this company with a $29 billion taxpayer loan. anything, i think the people in most of america, feel that there were two few strings put on banks bailed out by tarp and through this loan and through other benefits that were provided by federal government to the banks. they know they acquired the assets and the liabilities. we would send a terrible message if we said, oh, you know what? some people are going to get busted for material misrepresentations and fraud and some folks will gets a pa. we can't do that. we're prosecutors. this is not the only institution we're pursuing. i assure you there will be other case >> soas you heard this is only the beginning what could easily become a litany of lawsuits against big banks over subprime mortgage the and mortgage-backed securities, one ofhe primarircauses of the economic collapse. i would like to brrng in fox business's charlie gasparino, and dennis heller of better markets to talk about what

is next. charlie, i want to go right to you, you have breaking news on this, news you uncovered in the last few minutes. >> legitimate questions asked you might have asked me earlier in the day was, didn't jpmorgan, when they bought bear stearns get some sort of agreement --. melissa: harvey pitt and i were talking about it as well. >> comfort letter. melissa: indemnity. >> indemnity potential liabilities from bear stearns. point out it was shotgun marriage. i covered that particular episode for a long time. i covered bear stearns's steady demise into oblivion. let me tell you something, it was not a pretty sight. government, then secretary of treasury, hank paulson and jamie dimon said, please can you buy the company? we'll arrange a deal. jamie dimon bought it. they thought -- there is business reason to buy stuff but they thought they were doing the federal government a favor. here is what we know. there is comfort letter that the securities & exchange commission, linda thompson was enforcement chief at the

time basically gave jpmorgan. the comfort level however, only covers federal enforcement action. the agreement enforces the sec to weigh jpmorgan's role or more accurately lack of role, that is, quote, unquote in the comfort letter when assassing charges related to bear stearns. jpmorgan comfort letter covers bear stearns prior to financial condition. that was a concern. bear stearns is saying everything is all right before they blew up. we should point out the comfort letter covers other things that you keep the actions of jaep second testifies in mind the letter does not, here's where sceiderman has his loophole, does not rule out state enforcement action. when i talked to jpmorgan people about they basically said over though these days, remember it was friday, saturday, sunday, monday announcement or sundayight announcement. they did not have time to get 50 separate letters. melissa: certainly not. dennis, let me bring you in.

he basically called them liars in his statement to us here at fox business earlier. they stand behind their statements. a lot of people are asking the question today, five days out from the election, this is an obama task force, is the timing suspect? what do you think? >> well i'm certainly not going to defend the timing. better markets has been calling for accountability on wall street for a long time. in our view just like the law is applied on main street it should be applied on wall street. frankly this task force really doing what it should have done complaints like this should have been filed a long time ago. charlie knows well because he did a lot of reporting on this, these allegations there are two big complaints. ambac, the insurance company and fhfa filed prior complaints detail egregious conduct by the bear stearns people. melissa: if they're legitimate, why now? you're saying should have been done a while ago, they suddenly woke up now five weeks ahead of the election and decided to go after banks? >> i think these questions are legitimate. i think it is a grave disservice to the american

people. the american people are entitled to the law being applied to wall street. it shouldn't be done in context where their motives can be questioned. melissa: there you go. >> prosecutors ought to be on the job and doing a job for a long time. >> i will say this. i remember when then new york attorney general andrew cuomo, remember he came after spitzer. spitzer was governor about the time or about to leave at governor because of that sex scandal, governor cuomo launched investigation into mortgage-backed securities. that was at brand x at t time. i record that. he is something interesting i reported at time. governor cuomo's father, former governor of new york, governor cuomo himself, was very close, was friends with a guy named vince tece, number one board member on bear stens. i received an angry phone call from governor cuomo when i brought up that connection. there is one reason for the cynics and the conspiracy nuts out there why that case wasn't brought. i will point out this about eric schneiderman. as well. this is the most liberal activist public official

mayb, in a semimajor position in the country right now. it seems odd that brings it up now. melissa: besides the politics what do you think about jpmorgan's point that no good deed goes unpunished? obviously jamie dimon is not going to acquire a company he doesn't think he will make profitable at this point because th would be irresponsible to the shareholders. >> right. melissa: at the same time we all know that weekend they were trying to combine people who had deposits that could suort these banks and these brokerages that were going under. i think they feel like no good deed goes unpunished. what do you think about that argument? >> there is some merit to it. let's face it. jamie dimon didn't buy the bank out of public service. he got the bank originally at $2 a share. wait, wait. the united states taxpayers picked up or guaranteed 20 or $30 billion of the toxic securities. and they knew, that the what new york attorney general are and how they enforce the law. they did the for business

purpose. worked extremely well for business purpose. on the other hand the real question is, not just timing but why go after -- look there is plenty of banks. we know from goldman sachs and citibank the same allegations, same conduct. go after them all. >> you know why? melissa: what is answer, to that, charlie. >> i think answer jamie dimon has been outspoken critic of this administration and a lot of regulation. i will point out this stuff, there is difference between ken lewis buying the liabilities of countrywide en he bought them. no one really asked him to buy countrywide. he bought it. he thought i would build a massive mortgage empire with th, with that firm and difference between that and what went down with bear stearns. i can tell you this -- >> absolutely true. >> i wasn't in the room but i was pretty close. >> right. >> they asked him, they begged jamie dimon to do it. he could have walked away. that firm would have imploded. that would have created maybe what lehman created later on a financial collapse. melissa: we're out of time. i hope youoth come back and do the story again with us. it is not going abay

obviously. this is only the beginning. we'll have aot of opportunity ahd to tk about it and fight over. thanks to both of you for coming on. >> thanks, melissa. melissa: gary johon didn't get invite to the presidential debate but accepted a invitation to come on o show. the libertarian presidential candidate with his handicap of the obama-romney dual. plus a powerful coal miners union won't back president obama in the election. could this cost the president the swing state of oh? a lot more money and no mortgage-backed securities coming up. ♪ . ♪ [ male announcer ] how do you turn an entrepreneur's dream... ♪ into a scooter that talks to the cloud? ♪ or rn 30-million artifacts... ♪

into a hh-tech masterpiece? ♪ whatever your business challenge, dell has the technology and services to help you solve it.

from maine to maui, thousands of high school students across the country are getting in on the action by volunteering in their communities. chris young: action teams of high school students are joining volunteers of america and major league baseball players to help train and inspire the next generation of volunteers. carlos peña: it's easy to start an action team at your schoo so you, too, can get in on the action. get in on the action at actionteam.org.

♪ . melissa: so the stage is set. some presidential candidates are ready to go. the first debate is one day away. but the catch is the commission on presidential debates isn't allowing one candidate to participate. you can bet the commission is catching some flak for that. in fact two original sponsors have pulled their support. philips electronics and the ywca the man who has been excluded, gary johnson, libertarian candidate joins meow for an exclusive

interview. thank you so much for coming on the show and why do you think you were excluded? i want to tell people we have a little bit of a delay. ar it with us. i immediately made a mess of it but why do you think you were excluded? >> well, melissa, the presidential debates commission is not a governmental organization. it is a private organization. it's made up of reblicans and democrats. they have no interest in seeing a third party on stage, established after ross perot, really to prevent a ross perot from ever appearing in a debate ever again. melissa: what would you add to the debate? what do you think is going to be missing? >> the, the third voice on age that doesn't want to bomb iran. the third voice on stage that wants to get out of afghanistan tomorrow. bring the troops home the third voice on stage that believes that marriage equality is constitutionally guaranteed. the third voice would like to end the drug wars. the third voice that wants

to balance the federal budget now or we find ourselves in monetary collapse of. the third voice, hey, let's eliminate income tax, corporate tax. let's abolish the irs. let's replace all of that with a one federal consumption tax. i am embracing the fair tax, which think is really the answer to american jobs, in a 0 corporate tax rate environment. i say the private sector creates tens of millions of jobs. melissa: we know what you would bring to the table. can you handicap for us what you think the other two guys are going to do tomorrow night? who has got the strength? who has got the weakness? how will it come out? >> let me offer a prediction. either one of them get elected,e are going to find ourselves with a heightened police state. we're going to find ourselves in a state of continued military intervention that has resulted in hundreds of millions of enemies to this country that but for those military interventions would otherwise not exist.

and that we find ourselves in a continued state of spending, and debt that are absolutely not sustainable. my prediction. melissa: we know that from polls that you trail both candidates by a pretty wide margin. there is an ad that i'm going to play i've seen aired on various stations that is, i believe it's paid for by a super pac that supports you. it sort of shows, two mad scientists creating a frankenstein type creation. and you're not sure what it will be and turns out it is sort of and i guess elephant representing a republican. what do you think about this? does this ado what you want it to do? do you think, is it your style? >> no, it's not my style at all. it is a super pac ad. so we don't have any control over it whatsoever. i would like to make a pitch to everyone watching, get on our website, gary jobs zoning 2012. we've produced really

cutting-edge stuff that gets to the heart of the issues today. i'm appreciatetive of a super pac putting out an ad like this. melissa, no control over it, whatsoever. it is not a message in line with my style. melissa: what do you think you could do to pull ahead and be significant at this point? get some serious votes to have a serious chance? is there a stunt you could do? what could you do right now? >> well, getting in the bates, that would make the difference. let me just point out something that i think is obvious, maybe not so obvious. i'm polling at 6% nationally. do you hear my name six times every time you hear obama's name or romney's name 100 times? no, you hear my name one time for every 5,000 times, 5,000 times you hear these guys names. if i was just being reported right now for where i'm at from a polling standpoint i suggest to you, that the six wouldn't be six. it would be 8, 11, 18. that i would be the next president of the united states because i think

people really understand we're in deep doo-do in this countryand we can't bury our heads in the sand. when you listen to obama or romney, by extension i guess we think santa claus, the easter bunny and tooth fairy are coming. they're not. we have to fix this. mutual sacrifice on part of all of us. these guys are not doing either party, status quo don't do anything at all. melissa: i hearyou. we gave you your time. we're fair and balanced. we're in deep doo-doo. thank you for coming on, gary johnson. watch fox business's special coverage of tomorrow's presidential debate even though gary is not in it. maybe he will be in the next one. neil cavuto kicks off coverage beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern. a dominant coal miners union says it won't back president obama in the election. many say the war on coal could cost the president big-time. plus they may be the wealthiest people in the country but that is not stopping thousands of

millionaires from collecting unemployment checks. we'll explain that coming up. do you ever have too much money? ♪ .

♪ . melissa: so have you heard about the warn coal? i have but is it really a war? here is what we know. 200 coal-fired power plants are slated to coal with companies like duke energy saying all because of epa regulations. coal miners union is not endorsing president obama this time around. many say the state of the coal industry will be a big factor in the election. here is the question? is this because of regulation or is the industry shifting to cheaper natural gas. thanks for joining us. >> thanks for having me back. melissa: as you know i

covered the energy industry for a lo time and i do think the epa hates coal but i'm not sure if the transition we're seeing now is as a result of that or because natural gas is plentiful and cheap. >> both play a factor, by far the driving force is the epa's war against coal. melissa: how do you know that? >> first of all, president obama before he was elected last election time he said you could use coal but under his cap-and-trade plan utities would likely go bankrupt. he tried cap-and-trade. that failed. he is using epa after epa. look, from cradle to grave theye trying to bury the coal industry. you can't get a mining permit. in fact, arch coal had a water permit pulled during active mine. then they're making more expensive for utilities to use it with regulations. they're trying t regulate the coal ash. you can't build a future coal plant because of the greenhouse gas rule. from cradle to grave there is no coal industry. melissa: at the same time i'm seeing ads running in

ohio he is friend of coal industry. >> he is lying. >> does that have traction? i watchedt online, seems like he is quoting real things. >> the stats are what you said in the duck shun. look at what these utilities are saying when they're closing plants. we're closing this plant, duke eney, because of epa regulations. american electric power, we're closing because of epa regulations. first energy, we're closing because of epa regulations. plant after plant is closing because of the epa they have their boot against the coal miners throat. it may be political pay back. melissa: so what do coal miners, they buy there is war on coal or they think it is natural gas? do they really blame the president forhis? >> absolutely. that ishy you're not seeing coal miners union coming out and endorsing obama. they learned the lags at that time. we were at a rally with coal miners from west begin drove to ohio to lobby neighboring state to vote for future

president rney. melissa: are they endorsing president romney? >> well union is union. the is hierarchy. but the rank-and-file union and nonunion coal miners are i think going to romney. we met someone from the railroad. railroads get up to 30% of their revenue from coal. now those stocks are being hit. so a lot of blue-collar union jobs are on the line and these people are worried about their jobs. melissa: see i agree with you that it's a problem. i'm just not sure the message is getting all the way through. how many votes do you think this could possibly cost the president in oh? and could it decide the state? >> it could decide the state especially southeastern ohio where coal mining is important. look the state of west virgina, in a primary voted 40%, voted for a convict, compared to president obama. because of the war on coal i believe. and you also have virginia and pennsylvan, still involved with coal. so this could be a big issue but there is no doubt epa's war on coal is forcing these

utilities to close. every time a utility closes, utility workers aae getting thrown out. there is nowhere to ship the coal because they're not buying it. melissa: okay. i don't know. i hear you. have people on here say natural gas. we have to have both sides. thanks for coming on. appreciate it. >> thanks. melissa: time for today's energy report where we break down the biggest headlines impacting the industry and their impact on the economy. natural gas prices we were talking about, extending recent gains. coal snap in the midwest is you will tooing rally. natural gas prices are at the highest level since early december last year. 3.52 though. . epa giving green light to natural gas-fired power plant. blich hills corp will move ahead with the construction of $237 million, 132 megawatt facility in cheyenne, wyoming. russia strengthening its hold as the largest oil producer. country's energy ministry

said output hit record levels. russia is producing 10.1 million barrels of crude a day, the most since the colaps of the former soviet union. the oil field is the, tough one, is the industry's largest find since prudhoe bay in the 1960s. development of the feel has been plagued by cost overruns and technical problems in recent years. >> just because you're rich doesn't mean you can't collect unemployment checks. thousands of the nation's wealthiest are collecting them. should we cut them off? plus massive defense industry layoffs are many looking, the white house looking for political cover and taxpayers coulday for the a tax shelter. we'll explain coming up after the break. ♪ . gecko (clearing throat)

thank you, mr. speaker, uh, members of congress. in celebration of over 75 years of our government employees insurance company, or geico...as most of you know it. ...i propose savings for everyone! i'm talking hundreds here... and furthermore.. newcaster: breaking news. the gecko is demanding free pudding. and political parties that are actual parties! with cake! and presents! ah, that was good. too bad nobody could hear me. geico. fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more on car insurance.

♪ . melissa: so when it comes to unemployment benefits shouldn't there be a salary cap who is entitled to collect? a new report from the congressional research service finds thousands of millionaires collected unemployment checks during the recession. nearly one million households earning more than 100 grand a year did as well. some in congress want to cut them off. i say, they paid for it. but here to disagree with me is senior policy analyst at the heritage foundation, james sherk. james, tanks so much for joininus. make your argument. why do you think we should cut these folks off? >> the unemployment insurance system is designed as an insurance system but the premiums only cover six months of benefits. during the recession the congress extended the benefits up to two years. now year-and-a-half worth of benefits. but workers are still only paying premiums that cover six months of benefits. everything beyond that is charity. it is not entitlement.

melissa: that has nothing to do with wealthier people who are higher salaried people paid into it and getting befits on other end. that is congress's problem. >> well of course. it's a problem congress created and a it is a problem congress should fix. it is one thing to say that you collect benefits you paid for. but why should millionaires be collecting benefits they didn't pay for? melissa: so you would say they can only collect it for the time period that they had paid in for and then nothing beyond that? woulyou set a date? how exactly would you work it? >> well that is the way the unemployment insurance system works. normally you have only ssx months worth of benefits. unemployment insurance taxes come out of everyone's paychecks go towards providing benefits for up to six nths. what happed, it has been a horrible economy, a horrible recession. melissa: why thud anyone collect it after six months? why is it fair for some and not others? >> well it has been a choice congress made. it is a humanitarian choice. you can, there is pluses and

minuses of it. on the downside, a year and a half worth of benefits does cause people to stay unemployed longer. on the plus side, it is a help to people who are in difficult situation. but you ought to say, all right, if we'll have this policy only should be targeted to those in difficult situation. melissa: how is it not a difficult situation? if you're making $100,000 a year. you own a house. you're paying a mortgage. you feed your kids. you clothe them. you have your monthly expenses. lose your job because of the economy. i mean what are you going to stop paying as a result? why are these people in any less of an unfortunate situation then someone else who makes less but maybe they have fixed costs per month also lower than the person who makes 100,000 a year? both cases are kind of in dire straits. >> well, i think it is a different level dire straits. again it is charity. it ought to go to those who, --. melissa: well it is not charity if you paid into it. it is not charity. >> if you paid into it. if it is a gift from the government which is what these extended benefits are.

no one paid premiums expecting year-and-a-half worth of benefits. no one's txes were based on that assumption. no one is entitled to receive these benefits. you have an income twice or more than that of the household income in the u.s., pretty reasonable to say all right, at a time when we're running a trillion dollar deficit we'll not spend federal fund to subsidize a couples making over $100,000 a year. melissa: why should have charity for anyone in that case? i wonder who is the government official that decides at what point do we draw the line and say, this person deserves it, even though they didn't pay into it, at that level beyond that date and this next very first person does not deserve it and that's where the cuttoff is? i have the probm with someone in washington making that decision for any family. >> well, of course that is the problem with government tervention is that it is very blunt. it is very broad. the government doesn't do a very good job of handling many things. melissa: no. >> but at the same time, you have to draw a line somewhere and say look,

we're in a horrible fiscal situation. we've got to make cutbacks. imagine you've got two-income couple, a doctor and lawyer and the lawyer loses his job. well that is still a family with a six figure income there. why should we be taxing all americans to send them benefits? i mean --. melissa: i don't know, james. i don't want anyone in washington deciding which family gets cut off and which family gets charity. i just don't trust their judgment. that is the difference between one group of americans and another. james, thanks for coming on for the debate. we appreciate your time. very valid point of view. >> you're welcome. melissa: here is our question of the day, do you think people should be able to collect unemployment benefits if the household is bringing in more than $100,000 a year? i want to hear what you think. like us on facebook.co facebook.com/melissafrancisfox. follow me on twitter at melissaafrancis. i'm not a huge fan of the government. have you figured that out. >>hundreds of thousands of defense workerscould get laid off but the government doesn't want them to know

and the taxpayers could pick up a major legal tab to help the white house save face. that is coming up next. at the end of the day it is always about money. ♪ .

>> announcer: meet mary. she loves to shop online with her debit card, and so does

bill, an identity thief who stole mary's identity, took over her bank accounts and stole her hard-earned money. now meet jack. after 40 years, he finally saved enough to enjoy retirement. angie, the waitress at jack's favorite diner, is also enjoying his retirement. with just a little information, she's opened up a credit line, draininghe equity in jack's home. unfortunately, millions of americans just like you learn all it may take is a little misplaced information to wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft, and no one helps stop it better than lifelock. see, ordinary credit monitoring services tell you after your identity has been stolen. they may take 30 days to alert you-- too late for jack. lifelo hashe most comprehensive identity theft protection available. if mary had lifelock's bank account alerts, she may have been notified in time to help stop it. if jack had lifelock's 24/7 proactive protection, he could have been alerted by phone or e-ma as soon as they noticed

an attack on their network, before it was too late. lifelock has the most comprehensive identity theft protection available, guarding your social security number, your money, your credit, even the equity in your home. whwhile identity theft can't be completely stopped, no one works harder to protect you you even get a $1 million service guarantee. that's security no one can beat. you have so much to protect and nothing to lose when you cal lifelock right now and get 60 days of identity theft protection risk free-- that's right, 60 days risk free-- use promo code: notme. order now and get this document shredder to keep sensitive documents out of the wrong hands-- a $29 value, free. call the number on your screen. [♪...]

♪ . melissa: so up to one milliopink slips should be mailed out on november 1st because of the fiscal cliff but the labor department is telling those employers, don't bother. when companies like lockheed say they were going i follow the law and put the slips in the mail instead, the government said, well you know what? if your employees sue, we'll cover the cost. don't worry about it. how are they covering it? with your tax dollars in mind. sound like another case of government gone wild. joining me former labor department economist of the diana further government roth. you are author of a new book, further to disaster. only one reason to keep the pink slips from being mailed right w, because it would be bad for the president. what do you think?. >> exactly it, would be the bad for the president. essentially adding to the taxpayer bill to say the contracting agency, with you

what omb said, if it is a defense partment contractor and the firm has penalties for not filing this warren act notices, then the defense department is going to pick it up. and if 10% of defense company works are laid off fromockheed and boeing and raytheon, northrop grumman and general dynamics that adds up to $400 million in pennalities. that is extra 400 million. it is double that if they lay off 20% of their workforce. that would be 800 million. melissa: it is an outrageous move i about the government and i don't see this being reported in the mainstream media right now. in the case of lockheed mtin, they said, we're talking about 123,000 employees. and it is the law, labor department. that we mustarn them. and if you don't do something about the fiscal cliff, on november 1st, we need to mail out the slips, let them know. they have families. they need to know in 60 days they are going to get laid

off and the government said, shh, don't tell them. if will be okay. if they sue you, we'll cover the cost. it is a scandal. >> the gernment is telling companies to break the law. the reason you can see they're telling them to break the law, saying if there are any fines, if there any penalties we will pick them up. they're obviously looking at penalties and fines down the road. it is not the first time the obama administration has broken the law. just look at immigration when president obama couldn't get the dream act through congress, he just tells his immigration authorities just let the students stay anyway. defense of marriage act, he says don't enforce it. gm and chrysler, those creditors don't get their money. instead 40% of the assets go to the united auto workers. melissa: we're highlighting this particular story for our viewers because we watch out for their money. and it is their money that will be usedto pay tse folks. in essence, you at home are

being forced to make an obligatory campaign contribution to president obama because he is keeping these people from being angered and frustrated and agitated and upset right before the election and using your tax dollars to do it, right? >> it is exactly like that. like a bribe. it is like increased campaign contribution that these companies are doing by not sending out the required notices. and this should be shown in their sec filingings that they might be liable for $300 million in fines. they should be tellg their shareholders this. and it is also unfair to the workers who need time to plan, if they're going to lose their job. maybe a spouse wants to get a job. maybe they want to delay purchase of a car or dishwasher. they have the right to be notified. melissa: they do. diana, i want to point out. you're the former chief economist at the labor department. so you know exactly what the rules are inside. >> exactly. melissa: you know from looking at they absolutely should be warning them right now. there is no gray area,

right? >> that's right. because it is difficult enough to find a job plus in this job environment where unemployment i over 8%, everyone knows it is tough to find a job. you often need more than 60 days. it is not a compassionate thing todo to withhold the notice. >> it is outrage just. diana, thanks for coming on. we appreciate your time. >> great to be with you. melissa: a blast from the past. drivers in one state pay $1.84 a gallon at pump. how long will it take me to get there to fill up. that is coming up. you can never have too much money. ♪ ♪

[ male announcer ] how do you make 70,000 trades a second... ♪ reach one customer at a time? ♪ or help doctors turn billions of bytes of shared information... ♪ into a fifth anniversary of remission? ♪ whatever your business challenge, dell has the technology and services to help you solve it.

>> it is time for a little bit of fun with spare change. today we are joined by monica crowley and adam shapiro. okay, first up, a gas nation in michigan will back its prices to remind people of the good old days before president obama. the first 150 drivers were able to get their tank filled for $1.84 per gallon. it was part of americans for

obama's and prosperity agenda. you think this is a best way for the organization to ge their point across? i think it's pretty clever. >> they have failed to deliver mortgage help the millions of americans who are upside down. on this one, however, remember that the economy worldwide have gone into the tank. that is one of the reasons that gas prices came down. melissa: absolutely, but it is still very clever. [laughter] >> it is the first presidential debate coming up, and it will be that you can bet your $1.84 that they will be talking about energy a lot. this makes the point that barack obama has done everything possible to raise energy prices. years ago we said electricity rates will skyrocket in terms of slow walking permitting, the keystone pipeline,. melissa: the man hates gasoline.

>> it's clever, but if you want to hit the administration where they are truly weak, i'm talking about since last year, but he one-hit the president where he is absolutely week, mortgages, mortgages, mortgages. the administration has done nothing to help middle-class americans when it comes to this to here is another one. take a look at this. it is an advertisement from this pennis u.s. catalog. there are no women in any of the items in the ikea catalog. who are the customers they are trying to sell to?

>> cultural sensitivity. melissa: yes, that's right. >> if you want to talk about the real war on women, let's talk about this. you do have to be sensitive as to where you're trying to sell products be mentally recall that ikea had the first ads in the united states with the two men that were partnered. clearly, they are preparing the saudi's for two men at a time. it clearly. [laughter] [talking over each other] melissa: i feel so stupid now. moving on, the vp of operations for the denver broncos. john elway said he made the decision because he believes that romney understands how to get america working again by standing on the side of taxpays and small business owners. woody johnson also came out

supporting him, but he did it in a very interesting way. he said that he would rather that mitt romney win the election and they have a winning season for the giants. >> i think it is a safer bet. melissa: what do you think? >> it is tivo time and i think you have to be really careful when you are a team owner. john elway is endorsing colorado, they love him, so the question is you already know he needs to support them.